Natalia Ilyin makes the observation that most problems that design tries to solve are cyclical, and they have to approached from a different direction in order to create anything new. This is one of those things that seems so simple, but I had never really thought about it. Of course it makes sense. Take product packaging. Not only must a company rebrand itself every few years to keep customers interested, they sometimes must redesign packaging to adapt to new standards. Just as at one time designers had to figure out how to put nutritional information on packaged food, they now might have to redesign labels to reflect a possible change in California law that would require foods to identify genetically modified ingredients.
As the global market become more environmentally conscious, other more drastic changes might be considered as well. In 2010, Andrew Kim, then a design student, reimagined the iconic Coca-Cola bottle as a square, collapsible bottle . The argument was that the new design was both innovative
Does a Coke bottle in any other shape taste just as sweet?
and more eco friendly. While a rational individual recognizes that this might in fact be a better design, and one that would benefit the planet if adopted–is the iconic curvy shape of the Coke bottle too much to give up? I question this because it is something that anyone who has had to design anything has had to face. How do I take something that already has a context, given conceits, a history, a completely different, relevant spin? I’m not sure I have reached that point yet. I can copy and mime, but not spin off something new. Maybe if I had a subscription to some Felisimo pencils like Debbie Millman, I would be in better shape?